The Conservative Party

[Chippy_boy]

I don’t wish to go over old ground and I do have criticisms of that government too but I agree mostly with their economic policies. It was sustainable and they wanted to improve livelihoods but anyway it’s besides the point of the thread and we’ve been over this and just disagree.

As it is the Conservative thread, I think it warrants further discussion.

Evidently, IMO, Labour spending under Blair/Brown was not sustainable. They were running a deficit during times of strong economic growth. That is counter to all sensible economic theories and if they cannot balance the books in the good times, they had no chance when things turned south. That the 2008 crash was so enormous, was in a perverse kind of way a get-out-of-jail card for them. It gave them an opportunity to seek to absolve themselves of all responsibility and blame everything solely on 2008, whereas in reality the public finances were in pretty dire straights even leading up to the crash. Unemployment was rising, productivity remained low, borrowing was up, inflation was up. Brown had introduced 100 tax increases, and had few places left to go. The game was up.

The only difference between Blair and "normal" Labour is that it took 13 years for everything to unravel. Normally they fuck it up much faster than that.

 

[Chippy_boy]

It’s like major world events just go over your head. Looking at your graphs Labour eradicated the deficit in the late 90’s but then something must have happened, maybe 2001/2002. Any idea?

So your ascribing the rapid turnaround from deficit reduction in 1999 to rising deficit in 2000, as being down to the events of 2001.

I knew Blair was a man of great foresight, but I had no idea just how much.

I've no idea why I bother trying to justify or explain things to someone who (a) gets the basic facts so completely wrong, and then (b) is so closed-minded as to be unlistening to any argument. What a senseless waste of everyone's time. I'm out.

 

[Ban-jani]

As it is the Conservative thread, I think it warrants further discussion.

Evidently, IMO, Labour spending under Blair/Brown was not sustainable. They were running a deficit during times of strong economic growth. That is counter to all sensible economic theories and if they cannot balance the books in the good times, they had no chance when things turned south. That the 2008 crash was so enormous, was in a perverse kind of way a get-out-of-jail card for them. It gave them an opportunity to seek to absolve themselves of all responsibility and blame everything solely on 2008, whereas in reality the public finances were in pretty dire straights even leading up to the crash. Unemployment was rising, productivity remained low, borrowing was up, inflation was up. Brown had introduced 100 tax increases, and had few places left to go. The game was up.

The only difference between Blair and "normal" Labour is that it took 13 years for everything to unravel. Normally they fuck it up much faster than that.

No government is perfect, it’s impossible to not look a shambles at some points and I think the 3 majority’s New Labour won, they managed to avoid being so more than most.

I don’t think public finances were as dire as you think, they did borrow and the deficit did grow but borrowing doesn’t automatically mean a negative situation. I agree that spending does need to be curbed but it’s not accurate to suggest they spent without doing so.

On the contrary they are often blamed for the crash. The Tories constantly refer to “the mess Labour left us in”.

 

[Chippy_boy]

No government is perfect, it’s impossible to not look a shambles at some points and I think the 3 majority’s New Labour won, they managed to avoid being so more than most.

I don’t think public finances were as dire as you think, they did borrow and the deficit did grow but borrowing doesn’t automatically mean a negative situation. I agree that spending does need to be curbed but it’s not accurate to suggest they spent without doing so.

On the contrary they are often blamed for the crash. The Tories constantly refer to “the mess Labour left us in”.

Irrespective of the cause, as a statement of fact, Labour did leave the Tories with a mess.

And I am sorry, but I am going to dig my heels in on this one. You borrow to invest in infrastructure, public services etc and to try to stimulate growth during times of recession, and then you pay back that borrowing when growth returns. What you do not do is continue to overspend, year on year on year during the good times. That was madness and was always going to go tits up. The rampant spending saw a significant increase in the state of out public services, which no doubt in large part helped Blair win his 3 election victories. (The other part being the Tories being a shambles throughout that period.) But it was never sustainable.

 

[Fame Monster]

I get your point, and let me respond to it in broad terms. My comment about planning to ensure our infrastructure could cope with projected numbers was not a party-political one. We should have been planning for this for the past 30 years. Also, it's about priorities and what we should/should not be spending our money on. And yes also in the final analysis sometimes you just don't have the money available, and things will be tough. No-one would argue that the last 10 or 11 years have not been tough whilst we've been trying to get the deficiit down. Now it is down, hopefully we can start to reinvest again.

But there's still a deficit so surely a period of reinvestment would grow that deficit even further under traditional Conservative thinking? What happened to fixing the roof while the sun shines?

 

[Len Rum]

It really doesn't.

Truth hurts.

 

[Len Rum]

Meanwhile in other Tory news:
1. The SAJ on Peston says Brexit can still be achieved by 31st October even if it means working 24/7 until then. The Mogster subsequently announced today no plans to discuss Brexit in next week's Commons business.
2. Ruth ' formerly favourite to be next PM but resigned as leader of the Scottish Conservative Party for family reasons' Davidson has joined the gravy train by taking on a lobbying job as well as her role as a MSP.
3. Conservatives getting a hammering for their propaganda claiming the WAB had passed Parliament whereas it had only passed a second ( i.e. not final) reading.
Just a normal day in hypocrisy land.

 

[jay_mcfc]

So your ascribing the rapid turnaround from deficit reduction in 1999 to rising deficit in 2000, as being down to the events of 2001.

I knew Blair was a man of great foresight, but I had no idea just how much.

I've no idea why I bother trying to justify or explain things to someone who (a) gets the basic facts so completely wrong, and then (b) is so closed-minded as to be unlistening to any argument. What a senseless waste of everyone's time. I'm out.

You can't even read your own graphs.

From '97 when Labour came in and they rapidly reduced the poor deficit the Cons had left until year ending 2001 Labour had full control of public finances. From 2002 and the start of the war, they let it slip.

a- You say I get basic facts wrong and you say the deficit was rising in 2000.

b- Touché. You're so blinded by the Cons I'm gonna star calling you Boris.

 

[Chippy_boy]

You can't even read your own graphs.

From '97 when Labour came in and they rapidly reduced the poor deficit the Cons had left until year ending 2001 Labour had full control of public finances. From 2002 and the start of the war, they let it slip.

a- You say I get basic facts wrong and you say the deficit was rising in 2000.

b- Touché. You're so blinded by the Cons I'm gonna star calling you Boris.

Whatever. If you want to carry on with the ludicrous misconception that the Blair/Brown plan was all going swimmingly apart from the pesky 9/11 thing then be my guest. You are 1 lost vote to Labour I will gladly lose. Cheerio.

Funny how Labour always manage to fuck things up, but it's never their fault. They must be the unluckiest party in the past 100 years.

 

[Len Rum]

You still haven't understood the debt/deficit thing, have you. (Or else why do you keep mentioning the debt?)

And we'll have to see. The Tories are the party of financial prudence and will cut our suit to fit the cloth. Unlike your lot.

He does understand it.
Deficit and debt are linked.
While you run a deficit the total debt increases.
The bigger the deficit and the longer it continues the greater the total debt increases.
If you eliminate the deficit then the total debt stays the same and in the happy event you run a surplus the national debt starts to decrease.
See it's easy isn't it. So stop hiding behind this as though its quantum mechanics that only you understand.

 

[Chippy_boy]

He does understand it.
Deficit and debt are linked.
While you run a deficit the total debt increases.
The bigger the deficit and the longer it continues the greater the total debt increases.
If you eliminate the deficit then the total debt stays the same and in the happy event you run a surplus the national debt starts to decrease.
See it's easy isn't it. So stop hiding behind this as though its quantum mechanics that only you understand.

We should frame this.

 

[jay_mcfc]

He does understand it.
Deficit and debt are linked.
While you run a deficit the total debt increases.
The bigger the deficit and the longer it continues the greater the total debt increases.
If you eliminate the deficit then the total debt stays the same and in the happy event you run a surplus the national debt starts to decrease.
See it's easy isn't it. So stop hiding behind this as though its quantum mechanics that only you understand.

Thanks. They’re not as special or clever as they think they are.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Thanks. They’re not as special or clever as they think they are.

We're in good company ;-)

 

[Len Rum]

He does understand it.
Deficit and debt are linked.
While you run a deficit the total debt increases.
The bigger the deficit and the longer it continues the greater the total debt increases.
If you eliminate the deficit then the total debt stays the same and in the happy event you run a surplus the national debt starts to decrease.
See it's easy isn't it. So stop hiding behind this as though its quantum mechanics that only you understand.

We should frame this.

You should as it will help you to understand it, unless you wish to contradict me.
So come on then.
While you're at it I trust that you now understand that being in a Customs Union for goods doesn't mean mean you have to accept free movement of peoples as you were obviously labouring under this misapprehension.
Always happy to help with your continuing education.

 

[Ric]

Looks like those who were lauding Johnson as some kind of political genius who had completely outmanoeuvred his opponents less than a week ago might’ve been a bit premature in their praise. Seems very much like he’s completely boxed himself in at the moment.

 

[blueinsa]

Looks like those who were lauding Johnson as some kind of political genius who had completely outmanoeuvred his opponents less than a week ago might’ve been a bit premature in their praise. Seems very much like he’s completely boxed himself in at the moment.

Lib Dems are about to vote with the government for a GE imo as they want Corbyn as a temp PM less than they would want a dose.

I can even see the SNP voting with them as no deal is off the table and anyone still saying it is is running scared of the GE.

 

[Ric]

Lib Dems are about to vote with the government for a GE imo as they want Corbyn as a temp PM less than they would want a dose.

I can even see the SNP voting with them as no deal is off the table and anyone still saying it is is running scared of the GE.

This “running scared” mantra is playground stuff really. Johnson has no authority at present and has failed to deliver on his promises. The more he and his Brexit deal are scrutinised, the more holes start to appear. His support amongst the public could feasibly start to drop, so it’s in the opposition’s interests to exploit that rather than let him dictate the timetable. That’s how politics works. An election is obviously coming, just not when he demands it.

 

[Bluemanc100]

This “running scared” mantra is playground stuff really. Johnson has no authority at present and has failed to deliver on his promises. The more he and his Brexit deal are scrutinised, the more holes start to appear. His support amongst the public could feasibly start to drop, so it’s in the opposition’s interests to exploit that rather than let him dictate the timetable. That’s how politics works. An election is obviously coming, just not when he demands it.

If Corbyn gets anywhere near No.10 then those responsible should hang their heads in shame

I blame May personally for believing she could strengthen her majority at the last GE. Two clueless fucking spin-doctors / advisors at the root of that decision....

 

[Ohrodneyrodney]

If Corbyn gets anywhere near No.10 then those responsible should hang their heads in shame

I blame May personally for believing she could strengthen her majority at the last GE. Two clueless fucking spin-doctors / advisors at the root of that decision....

If Corbyn gets anywhere near no 10 then the electorate should hang their heads in shame.

 

[Chippy_boy]

If Corbyn gets anywhere near no 10 then the electorate should hang their heads in shame.

If Corbyn gets anywhere number 10, we may as well all hang ourselves.